This is an important, recent decision from the Supreme Court of the State of Washington, its highest court, involving a personal injury situation arising from a homeowner’s claim. The name of the case is Xia v. Probuilders Specialty Insurance Company, which was decided in April of this year.
The case involved a woman who bought a townhouse. She became gravely ill after moving in: the manner in which the water heater was installed in her home was causing a release of carbon monoxide.
Mrs. Xia notified the townhouse management company, which was responsible for the negligent installation of the water heater. The management company notified their insurance company under their liability policy. The insurance company said that Mrs. Xia’s claim was not covered because of a pollution exclusion in the policy. They denied having any duty to cover her claim.
Well, the Supreme Court of the State of Washington said, hey, insurance company. You are not looking at this claim the right way. While carbon monoxide may be a pollutant under the policy, you have to look at the cause of the loss, and the cause of the loss was the negligent installation of a hot water heater. The fact that the negligent installation caused the release of a pollutant that’s otherwise not covered does not change the fact that the negligent installation of the water heater was covered under the policy.
Rather than summary judgment being granted to the insurance company, the highest court of the State of Washington granted summary judgment on liability for the loss to Xia and deemed that the townhouse company was negligent in installing the hot water heater. The Court also sent the case back for a trial on both compensatory damages and damages for bad faith denial of the claim.
So, the insurance company’s determination to rely on this exclusion, even though the exclusion was arguably applicable to the loss, can still be found by a jury to be bad faith. This is a lesson in understanding how insurance policies can be read certain ways to create coverage, where insurance companies think the coverage does not exist.
The Supreme Court of the State of Washington certainly thought coverage existed, in spite of the fact that the pollutant that caused the injuries to Mrs. Xia was excluded under the pollution exclusion. This will be a very costly misinterpretation for this insurance company and an important lesson for all insureds and insurance companies in Washington State.
Please contact us with any questions or comments.
Evan S. Schwartz
Founder of Schwartz Law
Before choosing Schwartz law I was overwhelmed and confused about the whole LTD process and wanted to make sure I wasn’t making any wrong decisions for me and my family.
Once a high functioning sales and trading VP at a bulge bracket investment bank, I began to really struggle emotionally esp. after the ongoing stresses of some devastating family health
Applying for disability, even when the need has become obvious to both yourself and those around you, is not necessarily an easy decision. In my case it meant having to
When I came to see Evan Schwartz, I had already shut down my business, was in the midst of a horrible divorce, had no income and hadn’t even filed a
Evan Schwartz and his team of lawyers fought for me like no one has ever for fought for me before. After a series of bad experiences with both doctors and
The Chanin Building, 122 East 42nd Street, Suite 725, New York, New York 10168
Toll Free: (800) 745-1755
Phone: (212) 608-5445
666 Old Country Road, Ninth Floor, Garden City, New York 11530
Toll Free: (800) 745-1755
Phone: (516) 745-1122
Fax: (516) 745-0844